Direct Marketing in India has been around quite long, with pioneering publishers selling mail order books in the 1920s. Today, DRTV flourishes, as does e-tailing. Some marketers are using snail mail and email very profitably too. Yet we keep hearing that DM doesn't work because "Indians don't read!"
Our blog started as a search for sense in this tiny 'industry' but soon we began to search for sense elsewhere too. We haven't found much, yet...

Links we like

About Me

Nabanita started off as an agency account servicing person, but now works in a client organization, as a full-time consultant at the Taj for their database marketing.
Pabitra started as an copywriter, but has done plenty of planning, and some amount of analytics. He is a freelance copywriter.
Both of us believe labels are idiotic in direct: You think of everything, do what you're best at. This has led us to teach ourselves a fair amount of software too (FoxPro, SPSS, SQL, and, of course, Excel and Access).
We worship Claude Hopkins, revere Bob Stone, and idolize Robert Updegraff (Obvious Adams).

Saturday 6 November 2010

They drink urine and burn widows. No wonder they are so poor

In an article Possessions and the Extended Self Russell W. Belk writes, “Another example, perhaps repugnant to Western observers, is the drinking of the urine of Vedic priests to partake of the psychogenic properties of the Amanita muscaria mushroom that these priests ritually consume (Wasson 1972).” In the same article, he writes, “Until outlawed 100 years ago in India, the wife, as ‘property’ of a deceased husband, was expected to join him in death (Bordewich 1986).”

The first sentence implies that Eastern observers may not find the drinking of urine repugnant. Anyway, a little searching shows that Wasson’s conclusion was probably based on a single line, one that merely said that if you drank much soma (And scholars are far from anonymous what soma was), you urinated a lot. The drinking of urine was Wasson’s conjecture. (I invite you to Google the topic. It’s easy.)

And while I don’t know where Bordewich got his data from, I am quite sure it wasn’t from any sane source. The burning of widows accounted for a minuscule number of deaths when it was legal; and it was outlawed in British India in 1823, not 100 years ago (Belk’s article came out in 1988). To say that sati or widow burning was ‘expected’ is to say that white Americans were expected to lynch blacks (I do not mean anything derogatory by ‘white’ or ‘black’) every time they had an unsolved rape on their hands. Neither lynching nor sati was fiction; but that did not make either routine. Anyway, Bordewich wrote in The Atlantic, which is not an academic journal.

Academics are supposed to be looking for the truth, but when it comes to darkies, who cares? If these people are so poor, ignorant and corrupt, can they be humans like us? No, they must be absolutely irrigational and abnormal. Of course, we need not bother if they outnumber us 3:1 or 4:1 and, hence, whatever they do should to be the norm, not what we do.

I believe open racism is easier to deal with that this sort of bigotry, which comes out routinely in mainstream media and even in academic literature. Well-meaning Westerners may not recognise the problem: one hardly expects professors, journalists and columnists to be racists, and Easterners dare not write against the pillars of society. For if they do, they show how insecure they are, how afraid of ‘losing face’.

Anyway, I would very much like to do research on this topic, to show if this racism can be objectively exposed, at least as far as academic articles and books go.

2 comments:

Anonymous
said...

Pretty interesting site you've got here. Thanks for it. I like such topics and everything connected to them. I would like to read a bit more soon.Don't you think design should be changed every few months?